National MP Tim van de Molen has been stripped of his portfolios by Christopher Luxon after the Privileges Committee found his actions in a select committee were in contempt of Parliament.
An independent investigation into van de Molen's actions at the Transport and Infrastructure Committee were "aggressive in the sense of being hostile, unprofessional and with an element that was objectively threatening, but not in the sense of physical violence".
The incident involved Labour's Shannan Halbert.
Leader Christopher Luxon said van de Molen's behaviour wasn't up to the standard he expected.
“Tim has had a difficult year personally over the last year, but that does not excuse any MP indulging in the behaviour described in the report.
“Tim accepts all the findings and has publicly apologised. He has also committed to seeking coaching support to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
“Following a discussion with Tim this morning, I have removed all his portfolio responsibilities – namely Defence, Veterans, Building and Construction, ACC."
The committee found van de Molen's behaviour was such that Parliamentary staff considered calling security.
"We find that Mr van de Molen’s conduct towards Mr Halbert amounted to threatening him, that Mr Halbert was impeded in the discharge of his duties as a member, and that in doing so, Mr van de Molen committed a contempt of the House."
It accepted he didn't mean to threaten or intimidate Halbert, but "Mr van de Molen’s physical positioning, his words, tone, and failure to move aside when asked—justify a finding that his conduct was objectively threatening".
Labour's Rachel Boyack made the original complaint.
'No place for that sort of behaviour'
Halbert said he had accepted an apology from van de Molen.
"It was really intimidating at the time. Tim had concerns about the question allocation [in the select committee], I thought as a chair I always act very fairly.
"I certainly did feel threatened at the time, I was seated and Tim was standing, but I've accepted his apology and I will work with him in the future.
"There's no place for that sort of behaviour, for threatening behaviour or intimidation in Parliament. It's not just about myself, it's about my colleagues [who] were in the room and particularly the staff and the team of clerks at the time."
He said whether van de Molen should step down as an MP was up to the Privileges Committee.
Halbert said he attempted to resolve the issue with van de Molen but "that wasn't acknowledged at the time".
"It was also acknowledged with his whip. At that time they saw that there wasn't an incident.
"I know as a junior whip that I should an incident come about one of my team members, I would act on that and ensure that the incident was resolved as quickly as possible and that's not what I happened here. I think the National Party certainly should have looked into it further at the time."
The original complainant, Rachel Boyack, said that she was concerned that National did not take the matter seriously.
"We raised the matter with senior leadership in the National Party and they made the decision not to investigate thoroughly. They denied there was an incident.
"We attempted on multiple occasions to resolve the matter, that would have been our preference, but we weren't able to which is why it ultimately went to the Privileges Committee.
"Mr Luxon went on breakfast TV, said he had spoken to his MP, and continued to contest the facts."
She said that National "needed to look seriously at its own culture".
When asked if it felt like van de Molen was goading Halbert into a fight, Boyack said "that was absolutely how it felt in the room".
National's Chris Bishop labelled Boyack's comments on Luxon as "irresponsible".
"Christopher Luxon said the same thing I said, that the facts are contested and that it was before the committee, which is exactly the right process."
Fellow Labour MP Willie Jackson said no one deserved to be intimidated.
"We all have robust opinions, I probably have as many robust views and debates as anyone but I haven't threatened anyone yet and don't intend to.
"He's got to be punished, and he deserves it and he should apologise too."
Behaviour 'perceived' as threatening - van de Molen
In a specially-called press conference this afternoon, van de Molen said MPs and parliamentary staff should be able to carry out their duties "in a stable environment".
He said the Privileges Committee's report "makes it clear my conduct... had an impact on others that I had not appreciated".
"I completely accept the findings of the committee. I apologise to all those who were in the room but specifically to Mr Halbert.
"I am horrified at the thought of my conduct having been perceived as threatening as this is not at all in my nature.
"I've fallen short of my own expectations and the expectations of this House... it was certainly not my intent to threaten Mr Halbert."
He apologised to National leader Christopher Luxon, the National caucus and his Waikato constituents.
He said he was fit to be an MP because he worked hard for those constituents, and had not considered resigning.
Christopher Luxon appeared separately to van de Molen, meeting reporters gathered after van de Molen had left.
He said there was a "path back" to van de Molen after being sacked from his portfolios.
Luxon said the party had taken the situation "incredibly seriously".
He said he was not aware of Rachel Boyack raising the issue with National before she complained to the Privileges Committee.
"At that point I actually spoke to Tim van de Molen and asked for his interpretation of events. He felt there were some aspects of that that had a different recollection of the incident."
Luxon said he had acted swiftly and appropriately to the report's findings.
"Tim could have apologised much sooner and much quicker and de-escalated the event and had it resolved, and that was poor judgment on his behalf."
SHARE ME